A. Yes.

Q.-You are acquainted with the old river?

A.-Well, not much acquainted with the old river. I have run the old river-not for years.

Q.-They did occasionally run it in eighteen hundred and fortynine and eighteen hundred and fifty with steamers?

A. Yes, at that time. I have not run it much. Couldn't say much about it. I haven't been down over it for years. Q. In regard to this filling, Captain-does it fill from the mines, do you think?

A. Yes, sir; all fills from the mines.

Q.-There is one question-I presume we may ask the Captain that question, but I want to state it to the committee-it is rather a peculiar one. Now, it appears singular, and many persons have asked me, and I have heard it discussed frequently, why there is so much less water within the channels now at low water than there was formerly, even admitting that the channels are filling in the same tendency. I would like to ask you, Captain, what is your idea in regard to that?

A.-Well, that is a simple question, in my mind. If you have got three fathoms of water here, and you have not got but ten feet up here, this fills up to ten feet and then remains ten feet. There you have ten feet, long before you had three fathom, and now you have not got but ten feet (illustrates). It will make a regular grade. Mr. Waters-You state you have been on the river since eighteen hundred and forty-nine?

A. Yes, sir.

Q-Have you noticed the difference in the quantity of land overflowed by freshets since this filling of the bed of the river-as to whether more land is overflowed now by water than was in early days, during the same stage of weather, for instance?

A.—Well, no; I could not answer that question, on account of levees keeping the water out. The lands are all leveed in now, and keeps the water out; but I have seen the lands covered from as far as I could see on both sides.

filled in just leaving all elevation out of view entirely-is not the bed of the stream lessened to the same extent that it is filled up? A.-Lessened in width?

Q.-No, sir; lessened in capacity?

A.-Oh, yes; lessened in its capacity to carry.

Q-Now, about how many feet in height or depth is it lessened on an average?

A. Well, at Hickox Shoals, say, it is shallow water, because it is a long reach and the water spreads all over and filling the bed of the river. Even where the narrows was, always had there plenty of water right straight across; but on the Hickox Shoals it was generally the same depth almost clear across. Take it on an average with that-well, you could not average with that, because, above and below we had any quantity of water. Well, the water had to pass from this highest place

Mr. Garver-Well, he wants to find out how much less capacity the river has?

A.-Well, another place would tell the capacity of the riverdeeper places you would not need now. Well, these narrow places have filled up entirely-just room enough for a smack to go down. Mr. Garver-Well, I will ask you one question-say right there at Sacramento, right opposite the cars, how much would you estimate the depth of debris there?

A. I should estimate it at about eighteen feet.
Q-Gravel and sand?

A. That is a pretty fair average.

Do you think, Captain, the river has filled eighteen feet on an average from its natural banks? A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Ostrom-At most all portions of the river it has filled up more or less, on one side or the other; is it less now on an average-the carrying capacity less now, on an average from the Sacramento side to the mouth of Steamboat Slough, for instance--say lower even, we will take the whole river as you used to run it and on average, counting the sudden filling and the bottom filling, all-how much do you think the average capacity would be-less than what it was when you first knew it?

A.-Well, I don't know how to answer that question. For instance, here is a reach here, and carries a small stream down here (showing), and this side the reach is clear, dry land. Now, here we have got a small space down here, probably one hundred feet wide, which before we had five hundred feet in width; it is filled up about four hundred feet, and made an island of it. Now, there are many places on the river filled up, and been made an island, that used to be deep water. Yes, deep-seven and eight feet.

Q-Well, include all those places in your mind, as near as you can, and make an average of the filling within the old channel, as you first knew it. Make an average of the carrying capacity of the river.

A.-Well, I should think one-half of the capacity is gone.
Mr. Garver-That is from inside of her banks?

A. From inside of her banks.

Mr. Waters-Are you familiar with the river above Sacramento? A. No, sir. I never went up there more than once.

Mr. Corlett's testimony having ended, the committee took a recess to half-past one o'clock.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The committee-Mr. Coffey absent-resumed their duties at one o'clock and thirty minutes P. M., and called as the next witness

T. T. ALLARDT.

Mr. Ostrom-I presume you are acquainted with the objects of this committee. We are here endeavoring to ascertain simply the facts as they exist in relation to the navigation of the rivers, the Sacramento particularly, and the Harbor of San Francisco, or any portion of it, and your opinion in regard to the cause of the same, and what, perhaps, would be a remedy. Now, you can, in your own way, just proceed and make any statement you see fit.

Mr. Allardt-This is a subject where there is a lack of data to give any definite figures, in a great many respects. I will confine my remarks more especially upon the effects to the Harbor of San Francisco-the effects of the debris, of the tailings, upon the Harbor of San Francisco. And there I will take the statement of other parties, as I have made no personal examination. The debris coming down the rivers is carried down the Sacramento River and its tributaries, passes Sacramento City, and finally reaches Suisun Bay. A large portion of that settles in Suisun Bay. The latter portion goes to San Pablo Bay, the still latter portion to San Francisco Bay, and out to the Heads. Mr. Arnold, the engineer of this Board, wrote an article. on this subject, and he makes this statement. He starts in with the statement that Doctor Logan, in a paper read before the Scientific Institute in September eighteen hundred and seventy-three, says: "The solid matter carried in suspension past Sacramento City is sufficient to cover in a year a square mile to the depth of two hundred and six and one-half feet." On this basis Mr. Arnold makes some figures, and in his article, which appeared in the Overland Monthly in eighteen hundred and seventy-three, he says this: "If, therefore, the sedimentary matter were all deposited in San Francisco Bay, the bay would be filled up to the line of high water in fifteen and one-third years." This being written five years ago, that would be ten years hence, and San Pablo Bay would be filled up to the same level in thirteen and one-quarter. Now, when Suisun and San Pablo Bay have become filled, when these last basins have become filled up, the next basin will be San Francisco Bay. This will be filled up in course of time, it being larger and deeper of course it will take further time, on that hypothesis. But these are only theories.

It occurred to me that to arrive at something more definite, this thing would have to be done. In eighteen hundred and fifty-six, the United States Coast Survey made a survey of San Pablo Bay, an

11

accurate survey and soundings, and in ten years later they made a survey of Suisun Bay-in eighteen hundred and sixty-six. This hydraulic mining commenced, I think, about in eighteen hundred and fifty-six or fifty-eight. Now, if the Government, or if a resurvey could be made of those two basins-Suisun and San Pablo--be made by the same authorities, by the Coast Survey, taking the same base, and compared with the surveys of sixty-six and fifty-six, probably, a good deal of knowledge would be derived as to how much had been filled up--how much had been filled up from artificial causes. There is a survey-I have seen it-a survey of these bays that was made in eighteen hundred and forty-one-it might be best to compare the survey of eighteen hundred and forty-one with eighteen hundred and fifty-six, when hydraulic mining commenced.

Mr. Smith-Allow me, in eighteen hundred and fifty-one.

Mr. Allardt-Well, I only throw out these suggestions. While if a resurvey could be had, and comparisons made, perhaps something very definite might be arrived at. I suppose it will be found that these bays have become very shallow. As to the general question of debris, it only occurs to me to say, that perhaps before any intelligent action of the Legislature could be had on it, it might be necessary to ascertain perhaps these points: First, the amount of material that has been removed by artificial means from the mountains from the time of hydraulic mining, which probably might be arrived at by measuring the excavations; second, how much of that material is deposited in the streams themselves; then how much of that had covered the valley lands, the farming lands, and finally, how much was carried away into the Sacramento River and into the harbor. That would be a labor of considerable magnitude probably.

Mr. Ostrom-I believe you was connected with Mr. Irwin in his survey of the bay here?

A. Not connected with him officially, but he and I have consulted and talked together a great deal on subjects connected with the harbor and islands here. I was the engineer for the Tide Land Commissioners here some years ago.

Q. What do you think of this phase of the question? We will say, for instance, that this year it would leave a deposit of six inches; next year it would be an additional fill, would it not, on that? A.-In the bay, do you speak of?

Q-In the bay, or anywhere-wherever this sediment settles? Next year, perhaps, it would fill eight or nine inches?

A. Yes, sir. I should say the tendency would be the rate of filling would increase, as the scouring and action of the tide become less. For instance, San Pablo Bay would finally become a river going through low lands-assuming this theory to be correct. Of course the whole theory then is based upon the statement of Doctor Logan, which I don't know is correct or not.

Q. Are you familiar with the Sacramento River?
A.-I have seen it frequently.

Q-Know anything about its filling?

A. No. I cannot state as to any changes at the bottom, from my own knowledge.

Mr. Byrne-Have you ever made any calculation to enable you to determine how much of this sedimentary deposit comes from hydraulic mines, and how much from the natural washing of the country; that

is to say, from agricultural lands which have been plowed up, or hillsides which have been cultivated, and the earth washed from them into the ravines, and thence into the rivers?

A. No, sir. I have no figures on that at all.

Mr. Garver-How much of this bay is filled by the dumping in here from the city? Wouldn't that spread over the bay considerably? What they keep dumping here, and it naturally being soft stuff, would flow out and get into the bay?

A.-There is undoubtedly considerable material goes from the street-the sewers don't amount to anything. But I suppose the most of the serious filling in is derived from dredging-dredging the slips and carrying it out into the middle of the bay, and then dumping it. What is dredged out here is taken out into deep water, a mile or so, and dumped into eight or tens fathoms water. It is more the pushing out the city front-that is, what I mean, the pushing out is doing more harm. For instance, Mission Bay, where the railroad company made embankments; they have narrowed the water on each side-made stone embankments.

Q.-Isn't that dredging injuring the bay more than the debris? A. No, I should say not. I should say that it was a small amount. It looks to be a good deal, but is really a small amount when you come to cubic yards coming down from the mountains. I would not be prepared to say what proportion it might be.

Q-Was you ever on the Mississippi River?

A.-Only as a traveler.

Q-I was going to ask if you had any idea what the comparison would be between the debris coming down this river and the sand there?

A.-It was pretty muddy there, but no comparison to the Sacramento in muð.

Mr. Byrne-I understand that you were the Surveyor of the Board of Tide Land Commissioners; as such you had occasion to examine the bays and all portions of the harbor here?

A. Yes, sir.

Q-From your own knowledge and observation, has there been any shoaling or diminution of depth of water in those bays from sedimentary deposit, since you have known them first?

A. Yes, I recollect making some comparisons with the Coast Survey soundings over at Point Oakland, and also in Richardson's Bay; and I recollect this, that it became somewhat more narrow since that time-perhaps half a foot.

Q-On the Oakland shore, and in Richardson's Bay, which is on the Marin shore?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you observe any shoal water at any other points or places? A.-No, not that I could make any statement about.

Q-What effect, in your opinion, will the reclamation of the large bodies of land, say at Sherman Island and other places upon the Sacramento, have upon this question, so far as the tidal area is concerned, and diminishing the effect of currents?

A.-You speak particularly of currents in the bay or in the rivers? Q.-Yes, sir; I speak of them in the bay, so far as they have a tendency to remove any little sedimentary deposits that may come from the mountains, especially as to the entrance at the bay, the outlet of the harbor?

A. The reclamation of the tule lands, if it was thorough and general, would result in confining the streams to their channels, and not spreading, as in the case of floods-not spreading over the whole country. The natural result of course would be that the velocity in the currents would be increased-the velocity in the motion of the rivers would be increased; in flood times the velocity would be increased. It would carry fewer material and carry it further-sedimentary material-down towards the bay. The result would be it would increase the sediment, provided the stuff from hydraulic mines was collected; it would rather increase the sedimentary deposit in those bays-Suisun Bay.

Q-What effect would that probably have upon the bar itself, or the entrance to the harbor?

and

A. That is a difficult question to answer. I would not like to venture an opinion upon it. There are different views taken on that subject, as to what forms the bar. Q-What effect do you think the filling in, say of Mission Bay, the filling in of this portion of the city below the original water line here, and other places that have been filled in in this city-what effect has that upon this question? That is to say, the shoaling of the bay, and particularly the shoaling of the bar?

A.-Mission Bay and the greater part of this water front, that is, the tide lands upon which the city has been now extended, I take it is naturally shoaling all the time, and would eventually become dry land; and making it a city and laying it out in blocks merely hastens that.

Q-Don't you think that the removing of sand from the lots and depositing it in the bay has a serious effect upon the shoaling of the harbor?

A.-Oh, yes! yes, sir! There ought to be provision made to prevent that.

Q.-Don't you think that is much more serious and dangerous than any debris that may come from the hydraulic mines in the mountains? In other words, hasn't it a more direct and injurious effect upon the harbor?

A.-It has a great direct effect, but I should certainly say that the point in comparison is very small as compared with that coming down from the mountains. It hardly makes the water turbid around here, while the debris from the mountains, either from artificial or natural causes, discolors the water in one river and the two bays and San Francisco Bay, so it must be very extensive.

Q. Did you ever make any estimate as to what proportion of the material washed from the hydraulic mines in the mountains reaches San Francisco?

it colors the water of the bay in one part as distinguished from another? That is, does it make it muddier in one particular locality than elsewhere, or does it generally diffuse this color all over the bay? That is, does it look muddier at San Pablo Bay than it does at Oakland?

A. Yes, sir; when you come to compare bays, it looks muddier at Suisun Bay than when you come further down. At San Francisco Bay the whole bay is sedimentary; the turbid, discolored streaks striking off where the currents run.

Mr. Ostrom-In crossing the bay to Vallejo, have you ever noticed when you get out some three or four miles you there see and begin to come into the muddy water? Did you ever notice that, over on this Vallejo route, in crossing on the steamer.

A.-In going to Vallejo, well then, we go to Red Rocks, in that direction?

Q.-Yes, sir?

A.-I cannot speak with definiteness on that matter.

Mr. Garver-I want to ask you this question: How does the debris get on this side? When the tide goes up it keeps the slack water up the river, the river water back, and when they empty, as I understand it, they both empty at once. How does the debris get over to San Francisco?

A.-There is a current from Red Rock, and it goes over on to the Oakland side. I don't know whether it is carried over to San Francisco.

Q-I speak generally, as coming into San Francisco Bay. How does the debris get up over this side, when the debris that is running out first follows the tide, goes out, and keeps debris back; when she empties she all empties at once; then how does the debris get over here?

A.-The debris would settle where the tide meets the current, wherever that is.

Q.-Yes, that would be way up above. As far as my experience in steamboating goes that depends on how high the river is. The question is, how does the debris get over on this side-how the debris gets over here? .

A.-I stated I have not studied the subject, and have no doubt others can answer it more satisfactorily than myself.

Mr. Ostrom-I have said that at sometimes a strong current sets around on that side of the bay?

Witness-On the Oakland side?

Mr. Ostrom-Yes, sir.

Witness-That is a fact. There is a strong current across from Oakland wharf, both ebb and flow.

Mr. Kercheval-The first meeting of the tide is at the Heads. The flood meets the ebb tide at the bar, at the Golden Gate, and it begins to back it up and back it up until it gets to the lighthouse. Wouldn't all the flood-water coming from the mountains down, wouldn't it be thrown back and diffused in San Francisco Bay until the tide is entirely checked, so that it begins to set it back in San Pablo. All the muddy water coming down to the narrows, there at the light house, until the tide checks it, naturally would be diffused through the waters of San Francisco Bay, then up to the Straits of Beniciaall the muddy waters, until the tide checks that downward current, would be diffused through the waters of that bay, and so on?

Witness-It seems so to me.

Mr. Kercheval-And then, of course, when the current sets in to the ocean again, that is to say, the ebb tide sets in full, of course they all commence draining down. I should judge that all those waters being diffused-the muddy water being diffused the muddy water settles during the time the flood-tide is running in, and of course goes on settling right in the wharf here.

COLONEL MENDELL.

Mr. Ostrom-You are acquainted with the objects of this committee. You can proceed and make a statement in your own way.

Colonel Mendell-Well, sir, I have not got very much statement to make. I am very willing to answer any questions, as far as I am able to answer them that may be asked me. I say, previous, I have not a very great acquaintance with the subject, though I am brought somewhat in connection with it by having charge of the improvement of the Sacramento and Feather Rivers, and also the construction of the Oakland Harbor has made me somewhat acquainted with the general condition of the harbor, and it is a very big and complicated subject. I have not formed opinions about it, but am very willing to answer any questions.

Mr. Ostrom-How long have you been acquainted with the harbor? A.--Oh, for a good many years; for the last ten or eleven years. I was formerly in California in eighteen hundred and fifty-four; I was here then four or five years, but my acquaintance with the harbor is more within the last ten or eleven years.

Q. During that time, have you noticed any marked change; any shoaling of any portion of the harbor?

A.-No, sir; the only way we could arrive at any such change is by sounding, by careful survey; and with regard to that matter, the way to ascertain that would be to compare the surveys that have been made at different years.

Q.-Well, I didn't know but what you had made some observations?

A. No, sir.

Q. You have been connected with the improvement of the channel of the Sacramento and Feather Rivers?

A. Yes, sir; the government made a little appropriation two or three years ago, and I expended that on those two rivers. In that way my attention was directed to them more than otherwise.

Q.-You were not acquainted with them before they filled up? A. No, sir. Of course I have been a traveler on them many times. I have never formed any opinion in regard to the former times other than any traveler would.

Q.-Well, I suppose you have a theory in regard to some remedy for this shoaling of the rivers? You have been employed in cleaning out obstructions?

that produces the bar should be likely to produce a second, then we dispose of it by treatment of the river-by building winged dams; besides, by the action of the current, we wash this material out. When it is gone from that place it goes somewhere else, and that accumulates in some other place, and then we have to go and try it in the same way. That is, substantially, the course.

Q-The effect of that is constantly to bring it this way.

A.-Oh, of course. All natural causes, and artificial ones too, are working to bring the mountains down to the level of the sea. The frosts and the floods, and the ordinary action of a stream when not in flood, are all in that tendency. You can see the results of that on the charts of the harbor if you will go back in imagination to the time when the whole of these tide lands that now border the bay that extend now to the level of ordinary high water; there was a time when these lots were under water, and the streams and the action of natural causes have raised these up to the condition in which they are now; and the same operation is going on all the time. The action of natural causes is to destroy our harbors, not only here but everywhere.

Mr. Waters-You say that even from natural causes the universal tendency is to wash the lands to the sea; now if that is the natural tendency, say you assist nature by means of these hydraulic mines, it increases it just that much.

A.-It undoubtedly has some increase.

Q-Then that debris that is washed out of the mines, it goes in the same channel, and is distributed by the same natural causes?

A. Yes, it goes somewhere; I don't pretend to say where it goes. Q.-Then you can go to a hill and measure a section that is piped out, and you can calculate that many square yards is carried off further, carried down below, and helping to raise the bed of some stream?

A.-Carried somewhere. But the part of it that was heavy-for instance, in hydraulic mining, large stones have passed down from these steep flumes under the action of that strong current, but they don't go very far. I presume, if you took the surveys and compared. them, the whole thing would be laid before your eyes.

Mr. Ostrom-I would like to ask you, Colonel-you are familiar with the channel of Feather River I believe that was three years ago that you worked on Feather River?

A. Yes, sir.

Q-How much depth of channel did you have there? A.-When we commenced?

17

material at the bottom, and the least little material would start it out.

Mr. Kercheval-This year the Sacramento River is little over twentythree feet above low water mark; can you give us any idea of the amount of matter that would pass in any given time?

A.-I don't know anything about it. The only way would be for a man to take a good deal of pains to ascertain it. I have not had occasion to do it.

Mr. Byrne-How long is it since you have first known the condition of the bar here?

A. I have been acquainted with it from the chart-well, always more or less since I knew anything.

Q. When was the first survey made?

A. The first survey I have any knowledge of was made by the exploring expedition directed by Captain Wilkes, long before the Americans occupied the country, in eighteen hundred and forty-one. I have Captain Wilkes' chart there in this bundle; it does not go into much details with regard to the bar.

Q-Well, what difference, if any, was there in regard to the depth of water on the bar then and now?

A.-Well, this survey that I have of Captain Wilkes is hardly in detail enough. There were only three or four soundings taken. There was a survey of the bar made in eighteen hundred and fifty, early in fifty, I don't know exactly when, and another one made in eighteen hundred and seventy-three; those two surveys are applicable for comparison.

Q.-Was there any survey made between those dates?
A. No, sir; not to my knowledge.

Q-Have you compared those surveys?

A.-I have compared those charts to keep the run of it-the one in eighteen hundred and fifty and the one in eighteen hundred and seventy-three, all the surveys by the Coast Survey-I am not sure with regard to the dates. I think one was in eighteen hundred and fiftyfive and the other in eighteen hundred and seventy-three.

Q-What difference was shown by those surveys with regard to the depth of water on the bar?

A. Well, it is proper to state with regard to them, that in order to get an accurate comparison, the plane to which the soundings are reduced must be precisely the same. The plane of mean low water to which the Coast Survey reduced their soundings, is not well established. In eighteen hundred and fifty-five, when the first survey was made, I am inclined to think that survey was not well established; made in eighteen hundred and seventy-three, then you could not and if their sounding was not reduced to the same plane as the one have a fair comparison for details, although good generally. The comparison that I have made of those two surveys shows more water and fifty-five. I have made a number of profiles from them; I have in eighteen hundred and seventy-three than in eighteen hundred got them in that bundle (referring to bundle on the table). Though those profiles indicate more it would not be fair to say that there is more, but I think that there has been no essential diminution at least. (Witness produces profiles.) As a general rule they indicate. more water than before. The blank line indicates the section (sec

3i